The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.

Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?

It stopped a 2 front war for Stalin. Therefore, whatever you're going to offer him to open this 2nd front better be worth it.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Stalin had one with Hitler and they fought the bloodiest battles of the war.

You forget that Hitler was the one who broke it.

Originally Posted by bonehead

I doubt Stalin would have lent anything to assist Patton march east through russia.

Actually south, Patton would land at Vladivostok.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Like you said, Stalin was adamant about a second front and Patton going anywhere but to face Germans, Stalin would not approve.

Stalin is a thug and thinks like a thug. You just have to make it worth his while. After all, he did broke the Non-Aggression Pact with Tojo.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Finally, I think Patton would have resigned his commission before taking anything from Stalin.

And give up the chance for payback against the people who did Pearl Harbour? Do recall that the man swallowed his pride and took command of a phantom army.

Originally Posted by bonehead

I would have loved being a fly on the wall when the German high command learns that Patton and his 3rd army just landed in russia because the Germans would have no doubt that Patton would have then turned west and joined with the Russians. It may have weeks before they realize that Patton wasn't there.

And after realizing that Japan was knocked out of the war and knowing 4 aircraft carriers were coming their way, it would have been an "oh shit" moment.

Actually, they were, we're not talking about finding 10,000 men where they're not supposed to be but instead 100,000 men with 1000 tanks and 2000 artillery pieces kicking your backdoor in. That was precisely Patton's relief of Bastonge.

Yes but they have to get to Northern China first, which was my point - would there not be a quicker/easier way of getting him to grips with the Japanese

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Explain the 1962 Sino-Indian War.

Pardon me but from my albeit limited reading the Sino-Indian war was an Infantry war (and light infantry at that) with limited artillery support and little or no armor. In other words the exact opposite of the war Patton would want to fight. In addition the Indians at least suffered from serious logistics/supply issues due to the nature of the terrain and lousy road system - which is a big part of the problem in this scenario.

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Wrong calculus, when was the BEF declared ready?

But the BEF only had to cross the Channel. I concede that the US may well have been able to form up a '3rd Army' under Patton around regular US Army formations at hand in the continental USA in early 1941 (or at least start the process) But it would not be the superbly equipped and supplied 3rd Army that Patton has at his disposal in Late 43/early 44. For example the M-4 Sherman was only just going into production which means the bulk of his armor units would be equipped with M-3 Stuarts and M-3 Lees. None of the other excellent armored support units eg the Chaffeys and all the M-4 derivatives etc would be available to him. Radios would be in short supply as would the engineering bridge building equipment etc needed for the road building operation. Again he could do it but not like he could in 44.

I grant you that M-3 Stuarts and Lees would be more than a match for the Japanese, while even a limited supply of M4s would be like hitting them with King Tigers given the types available to them but still Patton's 3rd Army, even in late 1941/early 42 would not be the 3rd army he commanded on his real campaign - not without a hell of a lot of build up time.

Yes but they have to get to Northern China first, which was my point - would there not be a quicker/easier way of getting him to grips with the Japanese

Northern China represented a force-on-weak campaign aimed at the heart of the Imperial Japanese Empire with zero opposing force stopping Patton. Just looking at the map, there are no major obstacles other than about 4 major river crossings. Would it be easy? No. Is it impossible. Not even in the slightest.

Originally Posted by Monash

Pardon me but from my albeit limited reading the Sino-Indian war was an Infantry war (and light infantry at that) with limited artillery support and little or no armor. In other words the exact opposite of the war Patton would want to fight. In addition the Indians at least suffered from serious logistics/supply issues due to the nature of the terrain and lousy road system - which is a big part of the problem in this scenario.

But the Chinese broke through and threaten the Indian interior and also, the InA was rushing two corps forward with the plan to drive the Chinese out of the disputed area. The point here is that a war consumes supplies a hell of a lot faster and harder than a march with no opposing force. While the actual fight was done by infantry, the assembly points were built up by roads and trucks. Again, the war shown the Himalayas is not that big of an obstacles. If the Chinese can threaten south, Patton could have marched north.

Originally Posted by Monash

But the BEF only had to cross the Channel. I concede that the US may well have been able to form up a '3rd Army' under Patton around regular US Army formations at hand in the continental USA in early 1941 (or at least start the process) But it would not be the superbly equipped and supplied 3rd Army that Patton has at his disposal in Late 43/early 44. For example the M-4 Sherman was only just going into production which means the bulk of his armor units would be equipped with M-3 Stuarts and M-3 Lees. None of the other excellent armored support units eg the Chaffeys and all the M-4 derivatives etc would be available to him. Radios would be in short supply as would the engineering bridge building equipment etc needed for the road building operation. Again he could do it but not like he could in 44.

I grant you that M-3 Stuarts and Lees would be more than a match for the Japanese, while even a limited supply of M4s would be like hitting them with King Tigers given the types available to them but still Patton's 3rd Army, even in late 1941/early 42 would not be the 3rd army he commanded on his real campaign - not without a hell of a lot of build up time.

Those are pluses. You don't have to build a bridge that can handle a M4. The Soviets killed the Kwantung Army in 1939 with T-26s. I don't see M-3 as a problem. Patton is a maneuver general. In my re-discovered view, the best during WWII. The relief of Bastogne is perhaps the greatest maneuver of WWII.

Not only do I think he could do this but it would have been his kind of maneuver.

[QUOTE=Officer of Engineers;1002750]It stopped a 2 front war for Stalin. Therefore, whatever you're going to offer him to open this 2nd front better be worth it.

[You forget that Hitler was the one who broke it.]

No. Nor did I forget how worthless such agreements were at the time.

[Actually south, Patton would land at Vladivostok.]

He could have landed nearly anywhere. Vladivostok would have been closer to Japan but if you want to screw with the germans you land in Ukraine or somewhere along the north coast(weather permitting) Thinking that Patton, his 3rd army and his skill with armored warfare was fighting side by side with the russians would have altered the German plans in some of the biggest land battles of the war.

[Stalin is a thug and thinks like a thug. You just have to make it worth his while. After all, he did broke the Non-Aggression Pact with Tojo.]

I agree with you on Stalin. I just don't think you could have convinced him to support anything but a second front for the germans to fight. Stalin was concerned about the thousands of russian troops dying every day and he was fighting for survival. Stalin wanted Patton fighting germans yesterday….not in 6 months.

[And give up the chance for payback against the people who did Pearl Harbour? Do recall that the man swallowed his pride and took command of a phantom army.]

This was after he slapped a couple of soldiers, was relieved of his command and fighting for his career. The fact that the germans paid so much attention to where Patton was and what he was up to made operation fortitude work. This also proves the german high command would have needed new underwear if they had credible info that Patton had just moved to the eastern front. Besides, it was the Germans Patton wanted to fight. That is where the glory was and he pictured himself right in the middle of it all. He studied german tactics, he thought the germans were the best and he wanted to beat the best.

[And after realizing that Japan was knocked out of the war and knowing 4 aircraft carriers were coming their way, it would have been an "oh shit" moment.]

I kind of doubt that. Germany put its faith in submarines and by the middle of the war had little faith in surface ships. Germany feared russian tanks far more than American carriers. Although, the thought of sending hellcats against 109's and 190's would be interesting.

He could have landed nearly anywhere. Vladivostok would have been closer to Japan but if you want to screw with the germans you land in Ukraine or somewhere along the north coast(weather permitting) Thinking that Patton, his 3rd army and his skill with armored warfare was fighting side by side with the russians would have altered the German plans in some of the biggest land battles of the war.

I'm lost to your scenario. My original post was for Patton to knock out the Japanese Empire. Why would Patton need to land in Asia to attack Germany? Also, anywhere on the European continent, you're talking about an opposed landing wheras there is no such in the Mainland Asia scneario.

Originally Posted by bonehead

I agree with you on Stalin. I just don't think you could have convinced him to support anything but a second front for the germans to fight. Stalin was concerned about the thousands of russian troops dying every day and he was fighting for survival.

You could have fooled us. Casualties wasn't his concern. He threw a 1000 men into Stalingrad a day and he had a million more where they came from. This is a country with 11 million military dead and that does not include the civilian casualties. Also, we gave him a second front, Italy. He wasn't satisfied. So, a deal could have been made and in fact, was made. For the 2nd front, he declares war on Japan once Berlin fell.

Originally Posted by bonehead

This was after he slapped a couple of soldiers, was relieved of his command and fighting for his career.

This goes to show that his career is more important to him than his pride.

Originally Posted by bonehead

The fact that the germans paid so much attention to where Patton was and what he was up to made operation fortitude work. This also proves the german high command would have needed new underwear if they had credible info that Patton had just moved to the eastern front. Besides, it was the Germans Patton wanted to fight. That is where the glory was and he pictured himself right in the middle of it all. He studied german tactics, he thought the germans were the best and he wanted to beat the best.

That wasn't his choice. It was FDR's. If FDR chosed Japan first, he would have been leading the charge also. Also, until Africa and Italy, Patton was an unknown in the German High Command.

Originally Posted by bonehead

I kind of doubt that. Germany put its faith in submarines and by the middle of the war had little faith in surface ships. Germany feared russian tanks far more than American carriers. Although, the thought of sending hellcats against 109's and 190's would be interesting.

The Happy Times I and II didn't stop a single thing and that was against un-escourted American freighters. The U-Boats already gave up the RCN guarded convoys.

But you missed the point, those 4 American carriers just told the Germans they lost the Battle of the Atlantic and 3 million US Marines were coming their way.

But the BEF only had to cross the Channel. I concede that the US may well have been able to form up a '3rd Army' under Patton around regular US Army formations at hand in the continental USA in early 1941 (or at least start the process) But it would not be the superbly equipped and supplied 3rd Army that Patton has at his disposal in Late 43/early 44. For example the M-4 Sherman was only just going into production which means the bulk of his armor units would be equipped with M-3 Stuarts and M-3 Lees. None of the other excellent armored support units eg the Chaffeys and all the M-4 derivatives etc would be available to him. Radios would be in short supply as would the engineering bridge building equipment etc needed for the road building operation. Again he could do it but not like he could in 44.

I grant you that M-3 Stuarts and Lees would be more than a match for the Japanese, while even a limited supply of M4s would be like hitting them with King Tigers given the types available to them but still Patton's 3rd Army, even in late 1941/early 42 would not be the 3rd army he commanded on his real campaign - not without a hell of a lot of build up time.

M3 Stuarts would have crushed whatever IJA had in China. Patton fought a different war than what IJA was used to from the Chinese.

I'm lost to your scenario. My original post was for Patton to knock out the Japanese Empire. Why would Patton need to land in Asia to attack Germany? Also, anywhere on the European continent, you're talking about an opposed landing wheras there is no such in the Mainland Asia scneario.

You could have fooled us. Casualties wasn't his concern. He threw a 1000 men into Stalingrad a day and he had a million more where they came from. This is a country with 11 million military dead and that does not include the civilian casualties. Also, we gave him a second front, Italy. He wasn't satisfied. So, a deal could have been made and in fact, was made. For the 2nd front, he declares war on Japan once Berlin fell.

This goes to show that his career is more important to him than his pride.

That wasn't his choice. It was FDR's. If FDR chosed Japan first, he would have been leading the charge also. Also, until Africa and Italy, Patton was an unknown in the German High Command.

The Happy Times I and II didn't stop a single thing and that was against un-escourted American freighters. The U-Boats already gave up the RCN guarded convoys.

But you missed the point, those 4 American carriers just told the Germans they lost the Battle of the Atlantic and 3 million US Marines were coming their way.

Japan was so far out in left field and had its hands full with the U.S. and China so it was not a threat to Stalin which is why stalin pushed so hard for the allies to open up a second front with Germany.Stalin couldn't have cared less about Italy. Stalin obviously would have poured every last man…and woman on the battlefield but in the end it was his people bearing the brunt of the germans and he wanted the allies to do their share of the bleeding.

I was referring to a landing in north Russia but georgia or Turkey would be doable. I misspoke with Ukraine. Patten didn't have to fight with the russians on the eastern front. he just had to make the Germans think he was. Either landings would have gotten the Germans attention and Patton could have been attacking the Japanese before the Germans realized he was not still in Eastern Europe. Another issue is you really can not stress the fact how important Patton was in the european theater. The U.S. had no replacement for Patton as far as turning a rag tag army into one of the most feared in Europe.No one was able to organize and motivate like Patton. He also understood the German generals on levels that was unparalleled. Patton's tactics shortened the war considerably and could have done even better if not for politics and having to play second fiddle to Montgomery. The U.S. already had a good general out fighting the Japanese. McArthur knew the Japanese like Patton knew the Germans. Instead of Island hopping we could have gone to NE Russia for a landing with his troops….leaving all those Japanese troops stranded on the islands.

Germans based their sea defenses primarily on their Uboats. If they had more subs at sea, the damages to the allies would have been much greater. After the limited success of his battleships Hitler all but given up on surface ships and he had no concept of how important carriers will become. Hence, a few allied carriers in the area would not have worried him so much as where Patton was. Germans focused on land and air battles and that is where they were determined to win or lose. The Germans knew the allies were coming to Europe and they were determined to stop them from the air and from the land…not the sea. Germans simply didn't think controlling the seas was going to make of break them.

Bonehead, please slow down and expand your explanations. I'm getting lost in your arguments. I'm getting the feeling that there are subtleties that are getting lost in your short replies.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Japan was so far out in left field and had its hands full with the U.S. and China so it was not a threat to Stalin which is why stalin pushed so hard for the allies to open up a second front with Germany.

There are other threads in this section that detailed Japanese desire for Siberia. However, what you left out was that Stalin clobbered the Japanese in 1939 when the Kwantung Army attacked Siberia and lost 65,000 men in the process. A weakened USSR would be a very tempting target for Tojo.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Stalin couldn't have cared less about Italy.

That's not the point. The point was that both the US and Great Britain had already lived up to the letter of the Potsdam Agreement. It was time for Stalin to pony up for Op OVERLORD and that was Op AUGUST STORM.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Stalin obviously would have poured every last man…and woman on the battlefield but in the end it was his people bearing the brunt of the germans and he wanted the allies to do their share of the bleeding.

You're not getting it. By Ops MARS and URANUS, the Red Army was the Herr's superior in operations and strategy. It was tactics that the Germans still excel at but the Soviets still made use of casualty intensive tactics not that they need to but because they can afford it and the Germans can't. By the Battle of Berlin, Soviet battle hardened veterans were taking on teenage boys and crippled old men.

Originally Posted by bonehead

I was referring to a landing in north Russia but georgia or Turkey would be doable. I misspoke with Ukraine. Patten didn't have to fight with the russians on the eastern front. he just had to make the Germans think he was.

Waste of good propaganda. The Soviets already had good maneuver generals that were giving the Germans headaches and heartaches. It might have raised a few eyebrows but would not have committed more German divisions than they already had. The battle space can only fit so many troops. For Patton to join the fight, a Soviet army must be withdrawn.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Another issue is you really can not stress the fact how important Patton was in the european theater. The U.S. had no replacement for Patton as far as turning a rag tag army into one of the most feared in Europe.No one was able to organize and motivate like Patton. He also understood the German generals on levels that was unparalleled. Patton's tactics shortened the war considerably and could have done even better if not for politics and having to play second fiddle to Montgomery.

Which again wasn't his decision. FDR did not decide to fight Hitler based on Patton being in the field. Had FDR chosen to fight the Japanese first, I strongly doubt Patton would have the nerve or even the desire not to plummel the Japanese.

Originally Posted by bonehead

The U.S. already had a good general out fighting the Japanese. McArthur knew the Japanese like Patton knew the Germans.

Well, you could have fooled me. The mistakes that man made was equal to his own ego. Besides, what's to figure out? The Japanese was best WWI Army fighting WWII. Zhukov figured that out in 1939.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Instead of Island hopping we could have gone to NE Russia for a landing with his troops….leaving all those Japanese troops stranded on the islands.

Doesn't that contradict your claims that MacArthur is a good general? The Imperial Japanese Empire was Korea and Manchuria and yet no one but the Soviets took that on.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Germans based their sea defenses primarily on their Uboats. If they had more subs at sea, the damages to the allies would have been much greater.

The Happy Times I and II (a disaster greater than Pearl Harbour) was the UBoat campaign against unprotected American cargo ships. Donitz had long lost the Battle of Atlantic to the RCN and RN before then. The Uboats suffered 80% casualties. And we're not talking 8 men out of 10, we're talking 8 boats out of 10, that's 8 crews out of 10, that didn't make it home.

Originally Posted by bonehead

After the limited success of his battleships Hitler all but given up on surface ships and he had no concept of how important carriers will become. Hence, a few allied carriers in the area would not have worried him so much as where Patton was.

Actually, they were. Uboats had no defence against air cover. Hence, why they never operated against convoys within range of allied air cover. US aircraft carriers guaranteed that the wolf pacts would be sunk before they had a chance to fire.

Originally Posted by bonehead

Germans focused on land and air battles and that is where they were determined to win or lose. The Germans knew the allies were coming to Europe and they were determined to stop them from the air and from the land…not the sea. Germans simply didn't think controlling the seas was going to make of break them.

3 million US Marines coming their way would get their heads up real fast

"There are other threads in this section that detailed Japanese desire for Siberia. However, what you left out was that Stalin clobbered the Japanese in 1939 when the Kwantung Army attacked Siberia and lost 65,000 men in the process. A weakened USSR would be a very tempting target for Tojo."

I have not been lost on Japans desire to expand the empire into Siberia, However, Japan had the U.S. to contend with and by1942 Japan was already in a losing series of battles in the Pacific. Japan also had millions of angry Chinese to deal with so a march into Siberia was out of the question. Even if Japan did invade siberia what would they gain as Russia could have let that go and more without hardly noticing it and there is no question that once Germany was done all Russia had to do is turn east and retake Siberia. Western russia was important to Russia, not siberia.

I have not been lost on Japans desire to expand the empire into Siberia, However, Japan had the U.S. to contend with and by1942 Japan was already in a losing series of battles in the Pacific. Japan also had millions of angry Chinese to deal with so a march into Siberia was out of the question. Even if Japan did invade siberia what would they gain as Russia could have let that go and more without hardly noticing it and there is no question that once Germany was done all Russia had to do is turn east and retake Siberia. Western russia was important to Russia, not siberia.

I am really lost with your contentions. Japan attacked the US, not Germany. Happy Times I and II came as a result of the US declaring War on Germany and not before.

So explain to me how all of this allow Patton to choose his own theatre of operations without answering to FDR?

"You're not getting it. By Ops MARS and URANUS, the Red Army was the Herr's superior in operations and strategy. It was tactics that the Germans still excel at but the Soviets still made use of casualty intensive tactics not that they need to but because they can afford it and the Germans can't. By the Battle of Berlin, Soviet battle hardened veterans were taking on teenage boys and crippled old men."

"Waste of good propaganda. The Soviets already had good maneuver generals that were giving the Germans headaches and heartaches. It might have raised a few eyebrows but would not have committed more German divisions than they already had. The battle space can only fit so many troops. For Patton to join the fight, a Soviet army must be withdrawn."

During the early part of the german invasion of Russia, Russia was fighting for its existence and Stalin had far more men than materials and supplies. What troops he did have were not well organized or trained. Germans did have plenty of both, well trained troops and the supplies. Why not force segments of russian society into the meat grinder as they were either going to starve to death or freeze the following winter anyway. Even so, russian casualties were rising fast and that was not good for morale. One cant blame Stalin at this point wanting the allies to open a front in Europe to take the heat off and give Stalin some breathing room.

If Patton did take his army into Russia the Germans would definitely know about it and would alter their plans accordingly. That much is clear and the reason Patton was given a phantom army in the first place. If I gave you the impression that I thought Patton would fight on the eastern front that was not the case. We can save that for another "what if". Patton would only be showing his ass to the Germans as he hopped on a train to china to take care of the Japanese first. That route looks to be a lot easier to manage than marching over the Himalayas.

I am really lost with your contentions. Japan attacked the US, not Germany. Happy Times I and II came as a result of the US declaring War on Germany and not before.

So explain to me how all of this allow Patton to choose his own theatre of operations without answering to FDR?

Short answer. Japan was getting spread too thin to invade siberia. Even if they did, Russia could have lost siberia to Japan and it wouldn't have mattered one iota for the outcome of the war. Patton goes where he is told to go in either case. But if Stalin had any say he would have wanted Patton to help defend western Russia

During the early part of the german invasion of Russia, Russia was fighting for its existence and Stalin had far more men than materials and supplies. What troops he did have were not well organized or trained. Germans did have plenty of both, well trained troops and the supplies. Why not force segments of russian society into the meat grinder as they were either going to starve to death or freeze the following winter anyway. Even so, russian casualties were rising fast and that was not good for morale. One cant blame Stalin at this point wanting the allies to open a front in Europe to take the heat off and give Stalin some breathing room.

If Patton did take his army into Russia the Germans would definitely know about it and would alter their plans accordingly. That much is clear and the reason Patton was given a phantom army in the first place. If I gave you the impression that I thought Patton would fight on the eastern front that was not the case. We can save that for another "what if". Patton would only be showing his ass to the Germans as he hopped on a train to china to take care of the Japanese first. That route looks to be a lot easier to manage than marching over the Himalayas.

Short answer. Japan was getting spread too thin to invade siberia. Even if they did, Russia could have lost siberia to Japan and it wouldn't have mattered one iota for the outcome of the war. Patton goes where he is told to go in either case. But if Stalin had any say he would have wanted Patton to help defend western Russia

You really missed the point on this one. Had Japan marched north in December of 1941, the USN would have sailed to Europe in January, 1942. Japan marches north. Japan dies and dies fast!

And that is WITHOUT PATTON! Zhukov was a superior general than Patton.

"Well, you could have fooled me. The mistakes that man made was equal to his own ego. Besides, what's to figure out? The Japanese was best WWI Army fighting WWII. Zhukov figured that out in 1939"

"Doesn't that contradict your claims that MacArthur is a good general? The Imperial Japanese Empire was Korea and Manchuria and yet no one but the Soviets took that on."

McArthur's first mission was to make Australia and the Philippines safe. After that it was to take the fight to the Japanese mainland. The strategy to get close enough for bombers to hit the mainland and eventual invasion was sound. Adding nuclear weapons was icing on the cake. I wouldn't get to hasty to compare campaigns though. Zhukov was not fighting on islands/jungles and he didn't have the Japanese navy to contend with. To be honest i don't think the American government put much stock in sending forces to China other than a few volunteers, ie flying tigers. The goal of the U.S. was to take the fight directly to the Japanese homeland and that is exactly what happened.